For the past few weeks, gun blogs and groups like the NRA
have been in a tizzy expressing their outrage over the proposal which would
have banned 5.56/.223 caliber rounds that were putatively armor piercing. The
ban is pretty much worthless and legally dubious, stretching both the
definition of ‘handgun’ and ignoring congressional intent. On the political
front, the usual theatrics were in play. The president prevaricated, calling it
“common sense” and accusing gun owners of not valuing police lives. As a result
of this proposal and the voluminous public outcry, Congress stepped in and
started pumping out resolutions and bills against the proposal and warned oflarger grabs.

The argument centered around a federal law banning armor
piercing handgun ammunition and the M855 round’s composition (and others like
it). Those who are fans of the popular American rifle, the AR-15 know that it
is easy to ‘convert’ a rifle/carbine into a ‘pistol’ by removing the stock and
adding a shorter barrel. Since it can be fired with one hand (and designed to
be fired that way), it is considered a pistol. It’s considered a pistol because
with a short barrel and a shoulder stock, it falls into the category of a short
barrel rifle. Thus subtracting the shoulder stock makes it into a ‘pistol’ to
avoid paying the $200 tax for a short barrel rifle. More about that here.

Many gun websites are heralding this as a victory, including
the NRA, who said “NRA Forces Obama to Wave White Flag on Proposed Ammo Ban …
For Now.” Of course, the NRA statement leaves out any mention of what was actually
said. The same theme carries over into many other sources’ articles and the
atmosphere on Facebook and Twitter is ecstatic that the threat of a ban is
over. But is it?

Take a look at the actual announcement from the ATF and read
carefully.

Notice that it does not say their proposal has been discarded,
cancelled, or delayed. It merely states that:

“Accordingly, ATF will not at this time seek to issue a final framework. After the close of
the comment period, ATF will process the comments received, further evaluate
the issues raised therein, and provide additional open and transparent process
[...] before proceeding with any
framework.”

Why is this wording so careful and so important?

In other words, they are not making a final decision. The
process of developing the framework will continue based upon public input,
which has been strong. Basically, they're saying: "We're listening! We haven't decided yet though." They are not saying "Wow, you sure showed us. We give up!" Quite the contrary. This is just PR of the same kind they've been showing through this process.

This weekend’s history regarding the so-called ban is
important. On Friday, March 6, it was reported that the ATF’s 2014 Federal Firearms Regulations Reference Guide
had any mention of the exemption that M855 and similar rounds enjoyed
removed. The implication was that the ATF had already made its decision, public
comments be damned, and the only mistake was someone catching it before the ATF
fully implemented the ban. Later that evening, the ATF tweeted that it was a
simple ‘publishing error.’ How convenient. Their full statement is here.

The Wayback Machine last crawled the ATF website on 9/26/14,
showing the 2005 version. It’s unclear when the 2014 version was posted, but it
shows it was updated on 3/07/2015. This adds credence to the accusation that
the ban was a fait accompli. The fact
that an agency, scrupulous to the point of being anal, which considers typos and mistakes on forms to be serious violations, would make such a potentially grievous
oversight in a publication is ludicrous. People’s businesses and freedoms
depend on accuracy in this document; if this was indeed a ‘publication error’
their bureaucrat in charge of this Guide
failed at a level of incompetency of the first order.

The ATF’s attitude of doing things in the un-American style
of regulations by decree, is highlighted in this Washington Post article. “Last
year, the ATF successfully banned Russian-made 7N6 bullets on the grounds they
were armor-piercing. Some gun-rights groups objected, but that ruling stood. ‘We
didn't put it out to comment,’ Seward noted.” By allowing comments (and
targeting one of the most popular rifles in America), the public raised such a
ruckus over this blatant attempt at infringing on 2nd Amendment
rights that the ATF could not simply sail full steam ahead to into the ban.
These kinds of tactics are right in line with President Obama’s promise to useexecutive action to further gun control because Congress democratically refused
to do what he said and infringe upon the Second Amendment.

It’s interesting to note that President Obama’s plans for a
renewed ‘assault weapons’ ban follows in the footsteps of the Clinton-era ‘Assault
Weapon’ Ban of 1994 (which expired in 2004 and Congress refused to renew).
Previously, AR-15s were not sold since the ban was enacted, as their pistol
grips and collapsing stocks (among other cosmetic features) supposedly made
them more deadly, which is a myth. The market for pre-ban rifles and magazine
was huge. Everyone though that the expensive, weird rifle that weren’t so
popular in Vietnam their fathers and uncles fortuitously bought would be rare,
collector items grandfathered into legality.

But that all changed in 2004. The AR-15 took off as the ‘American’
rifle, due to its iconic design, popularity with the military and police, as
well as its incredible versatility. Untold numbers of manufacturers offer their
own rifles and skilled craftsmen can make their own. Partly fueled by rumors of
another ban, AR-15s have flown off the shelves since December of 2012. Some
call it the most popular American rifle.

Is it any coincidence that the government is trying to ban
one of the most popular rifles on the market through ammunition control? Like
starving a person will kill them, taking away a rifle’s ammo, or ‘food’, will
render it useless. And once AR-15 ‘handgun’ ammunition is banned, the ATF could
easily use its regulatory powers to ban other kinds of ammo.

The final verdict? The M855 battle is not over. There will
be hoarders hoarding and gougers gouging for the green-tipped round (which
ironically was panned by the US military). Regardless of the cause, attempting
to infringe upon ammunition and firearms is why the Second Amendment exists. We
shall see what the ATF does, but we, the American gun owning public, shall not
go quietly into the night.

Many have feared the moment when the only recourse to
dissolving an abusive government is with a rifle. None but the crazy want a
civil war or insurrection. Far too many gun owners have been passive in past
battles, content to complain or let the NRA do the fighting for them. This time,
gun owners spoke up and did their part, forcing the ATF on the defensive and
warning them that further attempts at regulation by fiat will be fought tooth
and nail. Most importantly, gun owners showed that they can, are willing to,
and prefer to, fight with words rather than turning to arms. Gun owners seek
peace after all, but maintain the ability to preserve it.

Update: 3/12/2015

As I predicted, the assault on M855 is still going on. The ATF director Todd Jones is testifying to Congress that "'Any 5.56 round' is 'a challenge for officer safety." The good news is they actually are going to suspend altering the 'Framework' now. So did we win? Sorta...

Democrats in Congress are doing the opposite of Republicans (no surprise there) and writing a letter to urge the ATF to adopt the ban.

"Congressional Democrats are pressuring the Obama administration to move ahead 'swiftly' with a proposal that would ban a form of armor-piercing ammunition.

In a draft letter first obtained by The Hill, Democrats are urging the director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to use his “existing authority” to keep 'dangerous ammunition out of our communities.'

'We hope that the Bureau will swiftly review comments on the proposed framework and issue a revised proposal that will address the danger posed by handguns that fire 5.56mm and other rifle ammunition,' Democrats write in the letter."

The moral of the story is speak up. Makes lots of noise. The American government, though bulky and pretty intransigent at times, does listen to its people. You just have to remind them that we're in charge. We have won this round, but the battle continues.